Strange how none of the America bashing dickbags, defending backward draconian legal systems in Europe wanted to respond to this.

Nobody in this thread has "America-bashed", and you suggesting that's the case suggests you really aren't basing your opinion on anything other that YA! AMERICA! nationalism.

It has nothing to do with American nationalism and everything to do with the fact that this girl is receiving extraordinary scrutiny that cannot be explained by any other reason than that the scrutinizers have a bone to pick with Americans in general. There is no other explanation for continuing to insist "she must be guilty" even though any rational person would see that there is not nearly enough evidence to suggest she is guilty unless you have such an aforementioned predisposition to assume an American must have done it. And the way the Italian media covered it DID seem like America bashing to any non-America basher (funny how perspective works). Also: way to not respond to the sentence in bold by the way, I see what you did there.

doglover:manwithplanx: TFA said Italian Law cannot compel her to return to Italy from the United States

Ever hear of diplomacy?

You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.

Normally the U.S. would honor the extradition treaty, but I don't think they would in this case. Won't really hurt relations as both sides win. Italy gets to placate their America hating constituency that is convinced she got away with murder by at least making a show of it and the U.S. gets to give the appearance of caring for its citizens by refusing to extradite her. Win-win.

RenownedCurator:Ah, this thread again. Much like ethics_gradient, I also had the illuminating experience of being mistaken for someone else / messed with for kicks by cops (Eastern Europe, in this case). After three hours of being in a tiny room with four men carrying guns (this all started very early in the morning, as in 12 AM) I was a crying mess who had contradicted myself God knows how many times and who was less interested in convincing them of my innocence (since they'd made it clear they weren't interested in that story, and were insisting I had stolen something from someplace, never was clear from where) and more interested in finding the magic combination of words which would make them leave me alone. And the moral of that is ... confessions without supporting evidence are worthless. Spend a few hours screaming at, berating, and physically threatening someone and unless they're extremely unusual they'll say whatever you want -- or at least, contradict themselves often enough for you to catch them that way. If I had been with those guys for twelve hours, I would have been ready to confess to kidnapping the Lindbergh baby if they had made it clear that's what they wanted. (Incidentally, at the time I was also a white, decently-educated 20-year-old American girl. By the standards of some people, I guess that means I was actually guilty.

On the review, it was made pretty clear that Sollecito's knife was NOT a murder weapon, that they did not try to clean up the murder scene, that in fact they had fark-all to do with it unless somehow they learned to levitate and commit crimes without leaving a speck of DNA behind. With that gone, we were left with an unfortunately common and extremely plausible scenario; a burglar is surprised in the course of a burglary, panics, and murders the unfortunate intruder. The fact that Knox bought underwear, did stretches/cartwheels, and didn't clean the toilet properly has fark-all to do with her guilt or innocence. It's hard to believe Italy re ...

True. Still, it's a lesson: don't be a drug-addled skank when you're supposed to be studying overseas. Anything bad that happens tends to be blamed on the nearest foreigner. (There are variants depending on nation. For instance, travel guides suggest not driving in South Korea because, as a foreigner, you WILL be blamed for any accident even if it's 100% not your fault.)

Yes is it. We are talking about a country that makes Somalia look like a beacon to justice. The corruption that is running Italy is absolutely amazing. Naples is being buried under garbage because of a mafia run union battle, and the streets are lined with shiat.The water is poisonous, the pollution being pumped out of the factories would make the former Soviet Union look like Greenpeace, and... Need I go on? How can you defend this shiathole of a country?

/half Italian.

Italy being corrupt has nothing to do with whether or not Knox was involved with the murder of her housemate.

Actually both are true. Italy IS corrupt AND Knox was not involved with the murder of her housemate.

I'd prefer a proper trial, and not just your word for it, thanks.

The US media has fed you a very slanted view of the case.

Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.

Pumpernickel bread:You want your trade agreement, Mr Ambassador? *sips chianti* You give us the Knox girl and you get your agreement. And may your first child be a masculine child.

Normally the U.S. would honor the extradition treaty, but I don't think they would in this case. Won't really hurt relations as both sides win. Italy gets to placate their America hating constituency that is convinced she got away with murder by at least making a show of it and the U.S. gets to give the appearance of caring for its citizens by refusing to extradite her. Win-win.

That's the way I see this going too. To most Italians it doesn't matter if she's guilty or not, as long as they "win". This way everybody gets what they want ... except Solecito, poor bastard.

Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

steverockson:Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.

Isn't it interesting that Guede (who left his DNA among a bunch of other condemning evidence that he murdered this girl) has received compassion from the Italian media and actually had his sentence reduced by 14 years and could be out soon, while the other 2 (who aren't placed at the scene by even a scrap of evidence) are almost universally hated and condemned by most of Europe. Hmm, no - it couldn't have ANYTHING to do with Knox's citizenship ... it's totally just Americans that have it skewed, right.

spiderpaz:steverockson: Don't take my word for it, here's what the appeals judges stated in their opinion:The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".Without a connection between Knox, Sollecito and Guede the case completely falls apart.That's enough to prove to me that they're innocent and that Guede acted alone.

Isn't it interesting that Guede (who left his DNA among a bunch of other condemning evidence that he murdered this girl) has received compassion from the Italian media and actually had his sentence reduced by 14 years and could be out soon, while the other 2 (who aren't placed at the scene by even a scrap of evidence) are almost universally hated and condemned by most of Europe. Hmm, no - it couldn't have ANYTHING to do with Knox's citizenship ... it's totally just Americans that have it skewed, right.

JohnAnnArbor -- I think the bigger takeaway is "If a crime is committed to / by someone you know, get out of town before the local authorities conveniently pin it all on The Foreigner." Drugs and skankiness were secondary in her case, they were just convenient after-the-fact props used by the police to show how evil she was. I'm sure they could have come up with something else if necessary.

The Kercher family has been a nightmare, but the fact that they're willing to pursue Knox and Sollecito to the ends of the earth without saying a word about Guede and the fact that he'll be walking the streets again in a few years ... something's gone seriously wrong there.

Falin:How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?

furterfan:when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?

Don't you dare! Of course there'd be just as many Farkers here defending her to the death if she was a fat ugly black boy! Of course there would!

Bungles:Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

Bungles:TFA says she has in fact been acquitted. In the USA, that means the state is not longer able to prosecute unless some serious new evidence is found, and the old evidence is usually no longer admissible. That does not happen very often.

ethics-gradient:So. Taking the Knox, Sollecito and Kercher case as the good example it is what might we learn from it on a larger scale?

I believe this case is emblematic of the self serving, cynical, lazy ignorance of many conspiracy theorists that is rife in modern society but seems to hold more ground than it should in Italy. Their thinking is so often: "Life is complicated, the Yankees are naive and do not understand that behind everything is a deep dark conspiracy. Involving sex. Therefore it was not a case of a local murdering Kercher. Because that makes us uncomfortable."Yes life is sometimes so, but when it comes to the actions of murderers and rapists the simplest answer is usually true, albeit often hidden under a veil of illogic and bullshiat. The naivity and ignorance is, as is so often the case, on the side of the conspiracists. Fundamentally this is ineducated people trying to appear educated.

The fundamental flaw in the EU is that it pretends that a country where this kind of thinking has infected even people holding such an eminent position as a local prosecutor is on the same level as a well run sober north European country. Not just in legal matters but many others the EU is not sustainable in the long term until Europe's diversity is admitted to and factored in.

We have not done much better here in the UK as many have swallowed the bullshiat line fed by the tabloid press about this, and many other things. Why?Until this case I had honestly supposed that many tabloiud hacks wer cynically spouting lies. However seeing that Kercher's father, a tabloid reporter himself, actually believed the pathetic rubbish that the Italians came up with which allowed the man who murdered and raped his daughter to get off lightly, it looks like some of them actually believe this crap.The bottom line is that I am less concerned about the new press control law coming out her in the UK because I think that much of "our" media is so irresponsible, ignorant and gullible that it sho ...

Favorited for being one of the few voices of reason in this thread.

I care not about Ms. Knox's nationality, ethnicity, or whether or not she is "cute" or educated. Based on the evidence I have heard, I believe Amanda and her boyfriend were railroaded by a corrupt prosecutor with a history of misconduct. Her "confession" came after over 50 hours of interrogation without the benefit of a lawyer, or even an English translator. The only DNA evidence found in and on the victim belonged to one man-Rudy Guede, and he never named the two kids as "accessories to the crime" until he was offered a deal by the prosecution that cut his prison time in half. The prosecution's only "eyewitness" that placed the pair near the scene of the crime that night was a homeless junkie, who had coincidentally testified for the prosecution in 3 other murder trials and was later found not to be credible.

The entire case against Knox and Sollecito stinks to high heaven. I doubt the US will allow extradition, based on the acquittal and the so-called "evidence", but I also hope the Italian authorities don't decide to prosecute Mr. Sollecito again just to cover their own bungling asses. And to those who think something like this couldn't happen here, I imagine the people who have spent decades in prison for crimes they didn't commit would disagree.

It sucks for the family of the victim, and for the other guy who was wrongly accused, but I hope they realize some day how badly this case was farked up by the prosecutors, and that they can heal and get on with their lives.

This text is now purple:Bungles: Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

Incidentally, Knox should sue the crap out of them for libel.

I'm not sure how she'd win, given there's an open court case against her.

Bungles:furterfan: when you think of how many american travesties of justice have occurred in the same time period that this has been going on........ some get reported and forgotten.... it seems none get as much attention as this case

hmmmm

it wouldnt be anything to do with the fact that she's a pretty young white girl, would it?

Don't you dare! Of course there'd be just as many Farkers here defending her to the death if she was a fat ugly black boy! Of course there would!

If the only motive they could come up with is the fat ugly black kid had a satanic sex orgy without leaving any DNA while the legless attractive white guy shot her through the door. We would.

This text is now purple:Bungles: TFA says she has in fact been acquitted. In the USA, that means the state is not longer able to prosecute unless some serious new evidence is found, and the old evidence is usually no longer admissible. That does not happen very often.

She hasn't been acquitted. That has been overturned.

The US doesn't recognize overturned acquittals.

It's not an overturned acquittal.

She was never acquitted. She was acquitted pending Supreme Court review. The case has been ongoing since then. This was all perfectly clear in the trial, if you actually followed it.

steverockson:Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

Bungles:steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

R.A.Danny:Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states: "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested." I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not. It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition. Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.

GungFu:Everyone else sees somehow who lied, accused an innocent man and has generally shown to be a bit of a coont.

She didn't give the guy's name to the prosecutors, only after it was suggested to her after several days of interrogation and abuse (or, I'm sorry, slapping her on the head to 'help her remember' was the interrogator's official line) did they coerce her into agreeing with their then-false theory that this guy did it...

If being a bit of a coont is proof of murder in Italy, you're Ted farking Bundy.

steverockson:Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

SkinnyHead:R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states: "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested." I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not. It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition. Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.

I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.

Bungles:steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved. Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?". This is beyond implausible.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Like making it about Amanda's sex life, or a confession that was beat out of her? Something like that?

The case wasn't solely about her sex life, and the "beating" claim was part of her defense, so I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say.

You said very specifically that the verdict should be based on proving a connection between two people, rather than proving her responsible in some way for Kercher's death. That is exactly the same trick as "if the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit". You're trying to change the question.

steverockson:Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved. Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?". This is beyond implausible.

No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

Bungles:steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved. Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?". This is beyond implausible.

No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

R.A.Danny:Bungles: That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox...

They let her out of prison and out of the country. Sounds like they ruled in her "favour".

They did, pending review. The review has just happened.

Whether she should remain in Italy since the verdict until today was discussed at length when the appeal finished, and the general consensus was she would flee and never return (as anyone probably would have done in the circumstances, guilty or innocent). There was no legal requirement for her to remain during this period, although she of course gave assurances to the court she would, as is protocol.

steverockson:Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved. Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?". This is beyond implausible.

No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

Proving that they met when high a few hours earlier doesn't prove that they subsequently raped and murdered Kercher.

steverockson:It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

Bungles:steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: steverockson: Bungles: Falin: How anyone who has paid any real amount of attention to this case can side with anyone besides Knox is completely beyond me. I guess the biases in place here are very complex.

That's a very US-centric view, and it's understandable, given the nature of the coverage there, especially the weight that certain books were given.

Most people in Europe don't know precisely what happened, because the prosecution was so botched, but not many think Knox is innocent. There are gaping holes in the story, and hopefully this retrial will address them.

Frankly, the people I trust most in this are the Kerchers, who have remained superhumanly calm throughout the entire procedure, and they have welcomed this turn of events.

No, why would you use that analogy? The two cases are not similar at all.

Trying to make the verdict about something that isn't the actual murder exactly like that.

Look, it's not in dispute that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Since there is no connection between Guede and Knox/Sollecito then they could not have been involved. Unless you're saying they came over to the apartment, caught Guede in the act and said, "Hey, that's pretty neat, can we help?". This is beyond implausible.

No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

Proving ...

I'm not saying it does, but proving that they WEREN'T connected in any way proves that they weren't involved. And the appeal judges said it in their opinion:The association between Sollecito, Knox, and Guede was "not corroborated by any evidence" and "far from probable".

So what the prosecutor's are expecting people to believe is that Knox and Sollecito collaberated with a person they didn't know in a brutal rape and murder? That just doesn't happen.

tallguywithglasseson:steverockson: It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

QED

Yeah, that's exactly the kind of argument the prosecutor made. It reminds me of the prosecutor in the WM3 case.

300+ posts and more than a few say she's guilty and claim anyone that says otherwise is white knighting. Well, put your money where your mouth is. Tell us what evidence there is that she did it. Tell us her motive. Tell us anything other than she acted like a brat and has an evil smirk, that would convince anyone that she, her new boyfriend, and some dude the barely knew, and not Rudy Guede did it alone.

If you can't do that you're just trolling, and it's becoming pathetic.

steverockson:tallguywithglasseson: steverockson: It IS the crux of the case. It's the ENTIRE case. The reason is because we KNOW that Guede raped and killed Kercher. Without a connection to Guede the case completely collapses.

They were having a "sex game", whatever the hell that is, which was stabby. For Satan. Then it all went wrong somehow.Also, Amanda Knox had previously had pre-marital sex with several different boys, which makes her a she-witch slut-devil.

QED

Yeah, that's exactly the kind of argument the prosecutor made. It reminds me of the prosecutor in the WM3 case.

Exactly. There are definite parallels to that case and the Knox case, such as the "satanic ritual" theories the way the "confessions" were obtained, and the contamination of the crime scenes.

Bungles:No, what I'm saying is that proving a connection isn't the crux of the case. They will have been, if she is guilty, in some way connected. But proving the connection isn't the guts of the case: proving her connection to the murder is. The how and why of the Guede connection is interesting and potentially important, but it isn't the holy grail of the case.

So your theory is that Knox and her boyfriend killed her, then Guede broke in later and had sex with the corpse?

Tell us Sherlock if they aren't connected to Guede whose DNA was INSIDE the dead girl, and whose bloody handprint was beside the body, what's the connection?

Bungles:SkinnyHead: R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states: "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested." I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not. It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition. Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.

I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.

The question under the Double Jeopardy clause is whether she was in jeopardy when she was tried de novo and whether the not guilty verdict terminated her jeopardy. You might be right that under Italian law, the not guilty verdict is not final and is only considered as "acquitted pending review." But a US court hearing an extradition claim will apply US constitutional law to decide the double jeopardy issue, and under US constitutional law, the concept of "acquittal pending review" violates double jeopardy. The Double Jeopardy clause prohibits a higher court from reviewing an acquittal.

SkinnyHead:Bungles: SkinnyHead: R.A.Danny: Not seeing the extradition treaty (and not being a lawyer so deciphering it would be lost on me) does the US have options when it comes to extradition or are we bound to just handing her over if it gets to that point?

The extradition treaty with Italy states: "Extradition shall not be granted when the person sought has been convicted, acquitted or pardoned, or has served the sentence imposed, by the Requested Party for the same acts for which extradition is requested." I'm not sure whether that provision applies or not. It could mean that extradition is barred only if she was acquitted by the "Requested Party" (i.e., the US).

Whether that provision applies or not, she can still plead the 5th Amendment Double Jeopardy clause ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb") to resist extradition. Because she was already once in jeopardy for that offense, she can claim that it would be unconstitutional to extradite her for the purpose of putting her in jeopardy again for the same offense.

I'm not sure that applies, since she wasn't acquitted - she was "acquitted pending review". I'm dredging about for the specific Italian term. It's best not to use the term "acquitted" as it makes people think it's the same as the US uses the term.

That clause would apply if the this latest judge had ruled in favour of Knox..... and *then* the Italian government attempted a retrial. As far as the law is concerned, this is the same case, just with a complex layered system of appeals and checks and balances.

The question under the Double Jeopardy clause is whether she was in jeopardy when she was tried de novo and whether the not guilty verdict terminated her jeopardy. You might be right that under Italian law, the not guilty verdict is not final and is only considered as "acquitted pending review." But a US court hearing an extradition claim will apply US constitutional law to decide the doub ...

But the point it she wasn't acquitted. She would have been acquitted today, had things have turned out differently.

I would think that legally, under US law, they would have considered the case on-going until today, should she have had the aquittal approved.